2010 articles

The Economist's GM debate finishes today

The Economist has a GM debate (sponsored by BASF) on the deliberately confusing motion: "This house believes that biotechnology and sustainable agriculture are complementary, not contradictory."

And the Economist's "Moderator" has also made a clearly slanted final comment approvingly quoting someone from Cuba saying they often genetically engineer their tobacco (?!!) so what's all the fuss about?

Voting in the debate finishes TODAY (despite a chart that suggests it still has 4 days to run), so please vote NOW and vote NO. And please pass this on: http://preview-debates.economist.com/debate/overview/187/Biotechnology

Message from Phil Chandler of biobees:

Please - show the GM industry what you think of them with just one click - no signup, name or email needed - just go here - http://tinyurl.com/3yk4xj6 and vote AGAINST the motion.

I suspect this has been worded in an attempt to ask a 'soft' question, which sounds harmless, so that people will be fooled into agreeing with it. But the fact is that GM and sustainable agriculture are NOT compatible, or complementary, as the very presence of GM in an open space means that organic and other non-GM crops will inevitably be contaminated. This is happening wherever GM crops are grown, and is well-documented. American farmers who were sold on GM ten years ago are now turning against it - listen to my podcast at http://biobees.libsyn.com for evidence of this.